"William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Bill Barker wrote: >> >> Remy was being really nice to the community by not requiring a vetoed >> patch >> to be withdrawn. Personally, I would go with j-f-c's position, and >> withdraw >> a vetoed patch immediately (and have done so on several occations, even >> when >> I got to re-apply it after enough discussion took place on the list). >> However, I'll go with whatever the community consensus is on this point. > > But isn't that statement too broad (to apply to trunk, I agree that in a > ready-to-release anytime sort of branch, disputed things should disappear > for a while)... >
There is no trunk in Tomcat :), and likely won't be until the sooner of a [PROPOSAL] or the Servlet 3.0 spec is published. As I said, personally I revert patches on a veto, pending discussion. But I'm going to back the majority on this point whichever way it goes. > It's in the context. If Joe suggests "hey, -1 to the way you presented > that, if you fix X you have my support" then it should stick a round a > while and let them sort it out. > > If Joe says "this feature isn't going to be acceptable because Y", well > then there isn't much to discuss at that point, and it probably should be > backed out right away while the basic idea is debated. > > Clear A/B options sometimes aren't that effective. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
